I was just having an argument with my mother about the Trayvon Martin case. She says that he was a thug and a gangbanger. I vehemently disagree. She said she would change her mind if I provided evidence that he was not, or evidence that George Zimmerman was a violent shithead. Could someone link me to a takedown of this talking point?

You hate ridden fucks will regret your words when you eventually grow up.

Peace.

being a thug and a gangbanger shouldn't merit the death penalty for the temerity of wearing a hoody, and being a violent shithead shouldn't merit an automatic void of the right to claim self-defence, so something has gone wrong in your argument already

Uh why don't you just ask her why she thinks he was a thug and a gangbanger? You're falling into the trap of letting people with horrible opinions push the burden of proof onto you. It legitimizes their viewpoint if you allow it and respond to it.

While you are technically correct (admittedly the best kind of correct), non-autists typically use the word "child" to refer to someone younger. By way of example a google image search for "black child" gives

This point will not win an argument because it is being deliberately misleading.

While you are technically correct (admittedly the best kind of correct), non-autists typically use the word "child" to refer to someone younger. By way of example a google image search for "black child" gives

This point will not win an argument because it is being deliberately misleading.

I know you're not from here, but "child" is actually the correct term to refer to youth under 18 for state and federal agencies with whom I work on a regular basis, hth

The only reason to hem and haw about Martin being a child is to play into the idea that black male youth are intimidating.

To what end? There is no audience of people to be shocked and appalled when his mum protests at the use of the word child. He doesn't win any PC Points to be redeemed for cash. It will achieve the opposite of what the OP wants.

If someone asked if I would be afraid of an unarmed child, I would say no, because I would be picturing something like

Which, oddly enough, is the same as the GIS result.

At this point the oh-so-clever internet lawyer types triumphantly cry "aha! So there is no reason for anyone to be threatened by seventeen year old!"

The reason most people get pissed at this argument is the Exclamation Marx's of the world know exactly what people picture when they hear the word child, and aren't arguing in good faith by using that word as opposed to a more descriptive one (teenager).

I didn't mention race at all you utter fuckwits. I'm just saying why, if the OP intends to convince his mother of something, this argument is a loser. Now I remember why I stopped reading this cesspool of SJW-ness.

For the record I don't give a poo poo what the color of your skin is, I would be more intimidated by a 17yo white guy dressed as a thug then I would by a 17yo black guy dressed nicely. I'm sure D&D can twist that statement into making me a racist somehow.

Also, you know, he shot the gently caress out of an unarmed teen while masquerading as neighborhood watch (he wasn't and had no right to be in the neighborhood, something every pro-zimmer person conveniently forgets).

I didn't mention race at all you utter fuckwits. I'm just saying why, if the OP intends to convince his mother of something, this argument is a loser. Now I remember why I stopped reading this cesspool of SJW-ness.

For the record I don't give a poo poo what the color of your skin is, I would be more intimidated by a 17yo white guy dressed as a thug then I would by a 17yo black guy dressed nicely. I'm sure D&D can twist that statement into making me a racist somehow.

I didn't mention race at all you utter fuckwits. I'm just saying why, if the OP intends to convince his mother of something, this argument is a loser. Now I remember why I stopped reading this cesspool of SJW-ness.

For the record I don't give a poo poo what the color of your skin is, I would be more intimidated by a 17yo white guy dressed as a thug then I would by a 17yo black guy dressed nicely. I'm sure D&D can twist that statement into making me a racist somehow.

"For the record I'm a huge crybaby and totally not a racist because white youths scare me more than black ones for some inexplicable reason, why won't the D&D social justice warrior hivemind leave me alone?"

Also, you know, he shot the gently caress out of an unarmed teen while masquerading as neighborhood watch (he wasn't and had no right to be in the neighborhood, something every pro-zimmer person conveniently forgets).

So, if this list doesn't work, IDK OP.

are all pretty good arguments though and won't lead to discussions on connotation vs denotation which is also a plus.

For the record I don't give a poo poo what the color of your skin is, I would be more intimidated by a 17yo white guy dressed as a thug then I would by a 17yo black guy dressed nicely. I'm sure D&D can twist that statement into making me a racist somehow.

I know you're not from here, but "child" is actually the correct term to refer to youth under 18 for state and federal agencies with whom I work on a regular basis, hth

The only reason to hem and haw about Martin being a child is to play into the idea that black male youth are intimidating.

I think you're missing his point

You're correct in saying Trayvon was a child. That's an inarguable fact. It's not being disputed. The mental imagery one associates with the word "child" is usually a person significantly younger than 17. So if you wanted to be more specific you'd say teenager or adolescent or something like that. Can we at least agree on that?

Engaging The Crybaby Tax's argument for even one moment, we're not trying to be specific, we're trying to convince some goon's racist mom that Trayvon Martin wasn't a thug and a gangbanger. For all intents and purposes, "child" is the superior nomenclature because it has pathos, and that's on top of being technically correct. I mean, ask Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin if they considered their 17 year-old son a child.

OP, tell your mom that the burden of evidence isn't to disprove Trayvon Martin was whatever stereotype for black urban youth is roiling around in that vacuous head of hers, but to prove that he was one from the initial position of him not being whatever. In little kid terms, "innocent until proven guilty".

As for establishing that George Zimmerman is a violent shithead, he's been charged with aggravated assault, domestic violence and battery as recent as winter of last year.

You're correct in saying Trayvon was a child. That's an inarguable fact. It's not being disputed. The mental imagery one associates with the word "child" is usually a person significantly younger than 17. So if you wanted to be more specific you'd say teenager or adolescent or something like that. Can we at least agree on that?